Tasing Moms Who Refuse Masks Does Not Make the World a Healthier Place

Once a desire—or even a good idea—is turned into a mandate enforceable by the cops, violence is only one disagreement away.


A much-shared video of an Ohio mom getting tased and handcuffed at a middle-school football game should be a reminder that turning everything into a legal matter is just begging for violent conflict. Once a desire—or even a good idea—is turned into a mandate enforceable by the cops, violence is only one disagreement away.

In watching the video, it's obvious that there was plenty of bad judgment going around in the open-air bleachers of Logan-Hocking School District that day. That goes for mask-resistant Alecia D. Kitts herself, rules-spewing school officials, and the Logan Police Department cops who escalated assertions of their authority over a minor dispute into a lightning ride.

Let's start with Kitts. Video of the incident starts after the cops grab her, but apparently that came after a prolonged argument over her refusal to wear a mask while watching the game. She claimed to have asthma and so be exempted, but that didn't satisfy the folks running the event who asked her to leave.

Here's the thing: while there's debate over the effectiveness of masks—the CDC is for them, while the World Health Organization remains lukewarm—that's irrelevant when you're in somebody else's domain. It's their property so they make the rules. If they want you to wear a face mask, or a propeller beanie, or to take off your shoes, you should comply or leave. That's just good manners. Throwing a hissy fit because a host asks you to do something you don't want to do in their facility isn't an option.

Second in the bad-judgment parade are the school officials, who must know that there are huge tensions over mask-wearing, which has become a point of contention and a partisan divide. Should it be that big a deal? That doesn't matter—it is. But there are constructive approaches for addressing controversial issues.

Cottonwood, Arizona—the town nearest me—settled on a workable compromise. The town has a mask mandate, which carries no enforcement provisions or penalties. Most stores post signs which are respected by the majority of patrons but ignored by a minority. There's a measure of protection for mask-wearers and a measure of independence for mask-refusers. Nobody gets hot and bothered because face masks aren't worth wrestling matches in the produce section.

Logan cops should have remembered that masks don't rate personal combat before they tased an ill-mannered mom over her refusal to wear a cloth covering in uncrowded bleachers under an open sky. There was no reason for that, aside from resentment that anybody could refuse their commands.

Admittedly, Kitts wasn't officially arrested for her mask-resistance; that was just the starting point. "It is important to note, the female was not arrested for failing to wear a mask, she was asked to leave the premises for continually violating school policy," huffs the Logan Police Department. "Once she refused to leave the premises, she was advised she was under arrest for criminal trespassing, she resisted the arrest, which led to the use of force."

But that's always the case. Selling loose cigarettes, or hanging out, or a faulty brake light easily turns into a grab-bag of charges, usually including "resisting arrest." Then we're supposed to believe that the subsequent wrestling, beating, tasing, or shooting are perfectly justified, even though it all started with some minor violation.

"Undoubtedly, lawmakers have put too many crimes and civil violations on the books that can lead to police-initiated contact, a phenomenon broadly captured by the term overcriminalization," Jonathan Blanks points out in a recent piece for Reason. "But every day, police officers routinely use personal and institutional discretion to ignore countless violations that range from jaywalking to not using a turn signal to public consumption of drugs and alcohol. Thus, the determination of how often and under what circumstances to make traffic or pedestrian stops is ultimately one of policy, not one of law."

Blanks emphasizes that the multitude of rules on the books put enforcement discretion in the hands of police officers. They invariably give some people a pass while coming down hard on vulnerable groups, such as racial minorities, as well as individuals that authorities dislike.

"The police go armed to enforce the will of the state, and if you resist, they might kill you," observed Yale Law School's Stephen L. Carter in 2014 after New York City cops killed Eric Garner in a confrontation rooted in the illegal sale of loose cigarettes. "Fewer laws would mean fewer opportunities for official violence to get out of hand," he added.

Face mask mandates are just another set of intrusions into our lives that set the ground for confrontations between armed enforcers and relatively powerless people. It's all about making the hoi polloi do what they're told.

That compliance and not health are the issue is obvious in the video of the Ohio incident in which School Resource Officer Chris Smith grapples with Kitts. That's certainly higher risk for spreading disease than is leaving an unmasked woman to sit on a bench at a distance from other attendees.

You could say the same of the unmasked psalm-singing protesters arrested last week at the city hall parking lot in Moscow, Idaho, for refusing to wear masks (and for add-on charges, of course). Putting hands on violators was riskier than letting them stand closer than social-distancing rules recommend.

It was the same in the past. During the Spanish flu pandemic, when mask mandates were as controversial as they are now, San Francisco authorities arrested 1,000 "mask slackers" in one day and jammed them into "standing room only" prisons—an environment ripe for virus transmission.

Let's emphasize here that the effectiveness of masks is irrelevant. We could find definitive evidence tomorrow that masks help to reduce the spread of COVID-19, and that still wouldn't add a gloss of brilliance to getting cops involved. Violent enforcement should be reserved for serious matters, not for failures of hygiene and good manners.

The same consideration goes for traffic rules, tax violations, loitering, and a host of other victimless or minor transgressions. The rules may involve policy preferences, or potentially helpful ideas, but making them enforceable by police action has very high costs of its own. There are remarkably few situations that are improved by introducing violent enforcement into the situation—especially when we know that some violators will get a pass and others will bear the full force of the law.

Wherever you stand on the mask debate, keep in mind that it's just one of many disputes over how people should behave. And whatever your preferences, having the police shove them down people's throats is unlikely to make the world a better place.

NEXT: Trump’s Tiny Tax Bill

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. FYTW is a catchier title for this.

    1. Every month start earning more cash from $20,000 to $24,000 by working very simple j0b 0nline from home. I have earned last month $23159 from this by just doing this 0nline w0rk for maximum 3 to 4 hrs a day using my laptop. This home j0b is just awesome and regular earning from this are much times better than other regular 9 to 5 desk j0b. Now every person on this earth can get this j0b and start making dollars 0nline just by follow instructions on the given web page… Open Site

    2. If you refuse to wear a mask on someone else’s property against their wishes, and you refuse to leave, you are trespassing. Removal is justified. Not sure the tasing was necessary.

      1. neither was the removal. choices were made.

      2. First, there are clear, distinct, indisputable exceptions to the mask “mandate”, which still is not a “law” by any definition.
        Second, this was not “someone else’s property.
        You know what else is justified, as per the Supreme Court? Killing a rogue public servant that is assaulting you or someone else without jurisdiction.

        1. Let me know when you’re gonna do it, and I’ll hold your beer in the hand that doesn’t have a camera.

          1. I quit working at shoprite and now I make $65-85 per/h. How? I’m working online! My work didn’t exactly make me happy so I decided to take a chance on something new…GHn after 4 years it was so hard to quit my day job but now I couldn’t be happier.

            Here’s what I do…>> Click here

        2. You’re saying that the school was outside of the PD’s jurisdiction?

        3. So you have the right to go into a restaurant and demand service while not wearing a shirt or shoes if wearing them is the policy of the restaurant and not expect it to take action if you force yourself into the facility?
          You have the right not to wear steel toed shoes to work if they are required by your employer and not expect the employer to take action?
          You have the right to yell at people during a theater performance when quiet is the rule, and not expect to have the theater take action?
          You have the right to not wear protective eyewear when entering a facility that states you must wear it, and not expect the institution to take action?
          You have the right to park illegally and not expect the city to take action to remove your vehicle if it remains illegally parked?
          You have the right to smoke a cigarette in a hospital when the rules state you cannot smoke, and you would not expect the hospital to take action?
          You people seem to forget you follow rules all the time and you do it quietly because you want respect, or service, or employment, but when it comes to a mask, a simple mask, then it interferes with your freedom? What is wrong with people like you? Follow simple rules or stay home. Like little children who cry because they cannot chew gum, or wear their ball cap at school. How did countries beat COVID? By wearing masks! Grow up.

          1. No country has “beaten” the China virus. No country is going to beat the China virus without truly draconian action, extended or permanent lockdown and isolation. The real problem here is that there’s no endgame. I’m not wearing a mask for the rest of my life and nobody should even consider that. Hospitalization and death numbers have cratered even if cases are high. Time for back to normal.

        4. Yup, and the rogue cops, which I refer to as “Pigs”, wonder why many folks in the public square hate them, and want them eliminated, one way or another. Not all law enforcement officers are Pigs, but many of them are. De-fund them or fire them.

          1. Art – police do not make the laws and sorry a governor’s order has the force of law. So the police are called to enforce them. A friend of mine was a doctor until he retired. He wrote the radiology exams for the national testing held in Tennessee I think. Anyway not just any doc but a really smart one. So if he says reputable studies show transmission of the virus is reduced by 96 % if both parties have on a mask, I believe him. I admit I haven’t seen the video but if this woman refused to wear a mask and resisted she needed to be tased and removed.

            1. So, the classic “following orders” defence for the cops, eh? Too bad that was trashed at Nuremberg.

      3. I wish he would have mentioned “whose property” it was. Since it was a middle school game, “ownership” might be debatable. Was it on a school field? What does “public ownership” mean anyway?

        In spite of all that, I totally agree with the author’s premises about “overcriminalization”.

    3. The cops aren’t tasing moms because it makes people safer, they’re doing it because it gives them an erection.

      1. Erecricution

      2. I would not doubt it! What if it is a female Pig? Does it give her an orgasm?

        1. depends where you tase her.

    4. Start making cash online work easily from home.i have received a paycheck of $24K in this month by working online Abq from home.i am a student and i just doing this job in my spare ?Visit Here

  2. Although Fox News replayed the video of the mother being tased, I never saw it on CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS or Bloomberg News.

    1. I wonder if the races were reversed with a white cop and a black woman would’ve resulted in more attention by the media? Perception is everything and they control the perception.

      1. I quit working at shoprite and now I make $65-85 per/h. How? I’m working online! My work didn’t exactly make me happy so I decided to take a chance on something new…FGb after 4 years it was so hard to quit my day job but now I couldn’t be happier.

        Here’s what I do…>>Cashapp

      2. +1 ; it would’ve been played ad infinitum with that racial composition.

    2. I never saw it on CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS or Bloomberg News.

      Perhaps they all felt it was “too local?”

    3. The GOP and their shill media FAUX News have always been explicitly misogynistic. Ailes was a symptom, not the cause. /second? third? fourth? wave

      1. You think that covering the incident is somehow “misogynistic”?

    4. If you watch Fox News you are not well.

      1. In my neighborhood there is a household that has paired a Biden sign with one saying “Vote him out before he kills us all”

        I doubt they “caught” that sick notion from Fox News

  3. “In watching the video, it’s obvious that there was plenty of bad judgment going around in the open-air bleachers of Logan-Hocking School District that day. That goes for mask-resistant Alecia D. Kitts herself.”

    “Let’s start with Kitts. Video of the incident starts after the cops grab her, but apparently that came after a prolonged argument over her refusal to wear a mask while watching the game. She claimed to have asthma and so be exempted, but that didn’t satisfy the folks running the event who asked her to leave.”

    Hey Tuccille. FUCK YOU.

    1. Why the hate? That sounds like a perfectly reasonable interpretation of events.

      They had a rule about wearing masks and distancing. She decided that she wasn’t going to do it. That’s the beginning of the chain of events.

      They ask her to put a mask on. She says no. They say “then you will have to leave”. She says no to that. They get a cop to enforce their “you can no longer stay here” order. It is a fairly straightforward sequence of events, which Tuccille reasonably neutrally describes.

      Why the hate?

      1. I do not know the cases in Ohio, but in New Jersey, not only are you excused from wearing a mask if you suffer from a medical condition that a mask would harm, but the store/property owner is expressly prohibited from asking you to verify that you suffer from a medical condition. They must accept your word for it. If that is also the case in Ohio, then both the property owner who asked her to leave and the police are at fault. Hence, the “hate.”

        1. But that is just an accurate description of what happened. Tuccille didn’t tell them to do that, or tell her not to do that.

          It is really easy to comply with this mask crap without suffocating. There is no requirement that the masks work at all to filter anything.

          Why do you think so many people are wearing those neck gator things as masks? Because they are easy, comfy and do not offer any resistance to airflow. They are also crap at protecting from airborne viruses, hence the change to the rules here in Florida that now say they are not acceptable masks. A rule change that nobody seems to care one whit about.

          So my interpretation is that she just didn’t want to wear a mask. She’s had 6 months to adjust to this new reality. If it really was that much of a problem, she’d have a ready solution like the ubiquitous neck gator.

          She sounds more like one of us idiots, thinking we have figured out a loophole in the system that we can use to get our way.

          1. No cloth mask is even potentially effective at preventing the spread of viruses. If Florida wanted to require people to wear full environmental supplied air systems, it would be completely insane, but at least would actually do the job they are claiming to be necessary.

      2. One might notice that there are actually health exemptions to the mask mandates based on medical conditions such as asthma. I wonder if the police ever asked to see her doctor’s note.

        Also, how absurd is it that in modern society you need a doctor’s note to go watch a high school ball game without a mask? A mask that until COVID was universally recognized as having no noticeable effect upon this type of disease?

        I think it’s amazing that we trust 200 year old temperature readings as gospel but not 10 year old peer-researched studies.

        1. And, oh by the way, asking to see a ‘doctor’s note’ would probably be a violation of a few HIPPA regulations.

          1. It would not, HIPPA has no such component (notice people who want to park in handicapped parking need a sticker or card on the mirror?). Most businesses aren’t going to chase you away from the motorized scooters if you want to use one, regardless of how ‘healthy’ you look though. Police and public-sector bureaucrats don’t think like a business.

            As far as I’ve seen, the mask mandate waivers are nebulous in how they’re supposed to be handled so ironically even if this woman would have qualified for such an exemption neither her or the officer were likely aware of how it was supposed to work.

            This seems to be a feature, rather than a bug, and it’s probably because the CDC doesn’t think people with conditions that might have negative effects (like a breathing condition) when combined with COVID (a respiratory disease) should ever leave the house again.


          Here’s the Ohio order

          Which would not seem to apply to her on a couple of conditions – it does not apply outside if you can maintain 6 feet.

          1. It also bizarrely requires a mask when waiting for transportation.

            Now, I get it if you are at the bus stop with 6 other people clustered around. But standing on the curb waiting for Uber? What the hell is the point of that?

            Waiting for, riding, driving, or operating public transportation, such as a taxi, a car service, or a private car used for ride-sharing.

          2. Additional exclusions include:

            Those with a medical condition or a disability or those communicating with someone with a disability;
            Those who are actively exercising or playing sports;
            Those who are officiants at religious services;
            Those who are actively involved in public safety; or
            Those who are actively eating or drinking.

            1. It took me less than a minute to find the medical exemption clause. Now I double dare you to get a clarification of what that means from anyone in government, or get such an official exemption on paper.

              1. In response to your dares, respectively, you won’t, and again, you won’t. Surprised? Hope not.

        3. Perhaps not a HIPPA issue, but certainly an ADA violation. A “reasonable accommodation” would have been to let her stay, separated from others. And you aren’t allowed to “ask for a doctor’s note”… that’s an ADA violation as well.


        4. So US have 4% of population and more than 20% of cases and deaths and you think that is good? Why do other advanced countries have mush less death and permanent injury from COVID, and are getting back to some state of normalcy? Because they had the commonsense, the simple thought process, the respect for others to wear a mask.

          1. Nonsense. Explain Sweden, where most people aren’t wearing masks. Masks didn’t help in Spain, France, Israel, or many other countries. The reason the U.S. cases and deaths are so high is because the U.S. uses a flawed standard for what is deemed “positive,” the U.S. total includes those who died WITH coronavirus, and because the U.S. has a bigger obesity problem than many other countries.

      3. ‘That sounds like a perfectly reasonable interpretation of events.’

        people are missing the point here; what is totally unreasonable is the school requiring both a mask and social distancing…state mandate requires masks be worn outdoors when social distancing cannot be maintained, and said state mandate is what the school should enforce, not its own convoluted germophobic agenda…

        this woman is in complete compliance with state law, as she is distanced from non related individuals; the school and the goons it hires has no business harassing someone complying with statewide mandates…

      4. She also said she had asthma which exempted her from wearing a mask and they still insisted on forcing her to leave. You left that part out.

      5. Her body. Her choice.

      6. only a fucking idiot think people own their own property and make any rules they want. how bout rules saying no negroes fags pakis? would not get far have the owner arrested. state forces you to hire retards non whites trannies etc. you dont own shit or make the rules. mask laws are accepted by the state cause they made them. you dont own your house that you paid off.they tell you what color how long the grass can get and need permits to blow your nose

    2. Sounds like a bootlicker’s perspective to me.

    3. Why did they exempt people with asthma if they can wear those shields that remind me of welder’s covering?

  4. I’d be a hypocrite if I didn’t apply the same logic to a white suburban mom as to a young black man. You don’t get to veto your own arrest. Do what the cops tell you to. It was an absurd situation, but the lady should have complied. People don’t get to tell cops what they are or aren’t going to do based on their own interpretation of the law/situation. That would be chaos. Resist arrest and you will be physically subdued; that’s the only option in a civilized society based on law and order. Don’t like it? Change the law. Don’t like the mask law? Vote them out.

    1. She looks like a Trump voter, so she deserved it/prog

    2. It’s bullshit for the white mom and it’s bullshit for the black man. Police have no moral right to be bullies. We have a right to expect better. Comply or die is no way to run a community.

      Don’t like it? We’re trying to change it. But assholes like you keep “normalizing” the criminal abuse by police.

      1. Trying to change it by burning, looting, and rioting is not change. And fuck you for being a goddamn pussy about it.

      2. “Police have no moral right to be bullies.”

        But, in this case, it seems like the alternative is for the owners of the land to shoot her. Once she refused to follow the owners’ rules, and refused to leave the premises when asked, she was tresspassing.

        So, when you have a trespasser, how do you get them off the property, if it isn’t to call the police and for them to ask the person to leave, then arrest them if they will not do so?

        This has little to deal with Masks. If you came into my house and refused to remove your shoes, and then refused to leave when I told you, we would be in basically the same situation.

        1. Once she refused to follow the owners’ rules, and refused to leave the premises when asked, she was tresspassing.

          Accurate, in a perfect or even just more libertarian world.

          In the actual world we live in, owners are prohibited from making certain rules. Such as, for example, putting requirements on entering the premises that violate statues like the American’s with Disabilities Act.

          While I have a lot of problems with the ADA, I have been told it’s still the law regardless of my opinion on the matter.

        2. If it is public school property isn’t the owners the public? In our town and the town I grew up in the football field is owned by the town, again making it public property. The school maintain the field, in lieu of rent but the city owns it.

        3. What the hell are you talking about “owners of the land & trespassing” it was a public school ball field you bootlicking imbecile.

          1. For the bootlickers, it’s public when “convenient” for legal purposes and private when not… as always. Like democracy, it’s great except when it’s not.

        4. The school grounds are probably owned by the city or the school district. Does the person who asked her to leave actually have the authority to speak on behalf of the city or district? Seems to me that what the city is allowed to ask of people on its property is limited by laws (and rightly so). “Public” property doesn’t mean everyone can do what they want with it. But it also means that the owner of the property can’t make arbitrary demands of the people using it.

      3. Police have no moral right to be bullies.

        You are correct. They are directly ordered to be bullies by their masters who were elected by the people. While ‘just following orders’ is hardly ever a valid excuse, it’s hard not to see the direct connection. Unless you’re, say, a soccer mom who has never been on the business end of the police and think mask mandates are great.

    3. “Don’t like it? Change the law. Don’t like the mask law? Vote them out.”

      I’m not aware of any mask mandate that was enacted by lawmakers.
      Rather, they were/are likely unconstitutional dictates by mostly Democrat Governors whose chief goal (for the past 4 years) has been to remove Trump from the office he was elected to hold.

      1. In this specific case though, it was the managers of the property enforcing their rules. Mask rules are silly, but property owners (or their delegates) should have the right to make said rules.

        1. Tey are required to bake a cake in the shape of a mask.

          1. Lol. Outstanding.

        2. It’s a public school, so the owners are the public. This is splitting hairs, yes the school manages the property, but she is technically the part of the ownership of the property.

          1. Not really, though. The owner is the state or city government.

            My rule: if I can’t sell it, I don’t really own it.

            1. That is a super argument for the total abolition of public property.

          2. She’s nothing. She was visiting/watching her son play from a neighboring district. He didn’t attend that school.

            1. Ohio distributes state funds around to local school districts to compensate for local revenue deficiencies, so if it was any public school in the state, she’s a part owner of it.

    4. Tasers are not compliance devices.

    5. ‘It was an absurd situation, but the lady should have complied.’

      she was in compliance with the state mandate; she was satisfactorily distanced from non related people, in which case the mandate does not stipulate a mask…

    6. At a certain point decent people need to start defying unjust laws. I think we are close to that point. There is unprecedented tyranny going on and it needs to be stopped. That is far more important than no one getting sick.

    7. IT WAS NEVER A LAW. that lady got more courage then a POS limp wristed slacked jawed pansy ass coward like you. I would be honored to have her as a gf or wife

      1. Spqr70ad. A governor’s mandate has the same force as law. Whether you like it or not.

        1. She was in compliance with the governor’s mandate. The public school officials were layering extralegal requirements on public property.

      2. Spqr70ad. A governor’s mandate has the same force as law like it or not.

  5. Don’t kid yourselves, brutal enforcement of petty laws by police is EXACTLY what the Karens who support them want

    1. brutal enforcement of petty laws by police against other people is EXACTLY what the Karens who support them want

      Make no mistake, most Karens consider themselves to be above the law. They’re the ones who knock ask to speak to the manager, call the cops, etc.

  6. Was the CDC lying when they said you didn’t need a mask or are they lying now that you do need one? Either way, they are liars.
    Don’t say the “science changes “, because the science is settled and they are experts.

    1. The CDC claims that masks will stop the spread of the virus at the same time it says (accurately) that masks will not stop smoke particles from the wildfires out west. Smoke particles are much larger than virus particles.

      1. I had to wear a face diaper yesterday for the first time in months. I could feel my breath whooshing out of the sides of the mask, and my glasses fogged. If my glasses fogged, that’s proof that aerosol particles are streaming out past the mask and the mask isn’t doing jack.

  7. Mask mandates are never a good idea.

    1. They are if it covers the entire face. For reference, see Sarah Jessica Parker.

  8. “while there’s debate over the effectiveness of masks”
    The “debate” is asinine. If you want to partially protect other people from catching your virus (and you can be infectious a couple of days before you show symptoms), wear a mask. If you want to protect yourself from catching the virus, wash your hands and stay away from other people. Wearing a mask does not protect you

    1. Wearing a mask does not protect you or anyone else.

    2. washing your hands doesn’t help much against an airborne virus. lots of doctors caught the virus, and they wash their hands better than anyone.

      1. Not. Doctors and other healthcare workers are shit when it comes to hand cleanliness. Under 30% compliance when they’ve been monitored for research.

  9. People in the stands should have started chunking water bottles at the cop and chanting black lives matter.

    1. +1 I thought they should have all removed their masks.

  10. Tuccile says “something you don’t want to do in their facility”
    Is a middle school stadium paid for with tax plunder “their” stadium, or does it belong to the people who paid for it? As usual, _Reason_ has forgotten it is supposed to be a libertarian publication.

    1. It depends on the contract between the actual owners of the facility, and those who “rent” it for an event, if such exists.

      But yeah, schools seem to claim all kinds of things while tending to ignore that the public pays for their ivory-towered bastions.

      Still, the lady should have left the event, assuming that those who put on the event had such mask-wearing as a condition of attending it.

  11. Tase the bitch. She was asked to leave, which would have perfectly well defused the situation.
    Hands up, don’t get tased.

  12. Sorry, this was just an entitled bitch who learned the hard way that the rules do in fact apply to her as well.

    1. The cops probably could have found a way to get the lady to leave without tasing her.

      1. Nope. Give me a taser and I’ll find a use case for it.

      2. Funny how they always managed to be able to handle that situation prior to tasers.

        But then again, they also had night sticks. You don’t see those nearly as often as you used to.

        I’d probably rather be tasered than beaten with a club.

        But you would think that simply having one dude grab each arm, they could “escort” her to the exit. Bouncers manage such tasks all the time.

        1. So, you’re saying we need Patrick Swayze and Sam Elliot from the 80’s cloned and distributed to carry out bouncer work?

          I’m on board. Even though Swayze is dead, I’m sure we can find some DNA somewhere.

          1. I imagine this would be way more interesting if we were talking about how the cop ripped out her throat instead tazing her 🙂

            1. Certainly one of the best cult hits of the 80’s, even if it was circa ’89.

              1. “A man puts a gun in yer face, you got two choices – stand there ‘n die or kill the motherfucker!”

        2. But you would think that simply having one dude grab each arm, they could “escort” her to the exit.

          That would be rape.

          1. Kidnapping.

        3. Fat cop was her height. Doubt he could wrestle a cripple, let alone an adult woman.

          As soon as he put his hands on her, it was going to end in violence.

  13. Since when is the school district’s field “someone else’s property”?

    1. That’s my question for everyone who keeps defending the school as the property owners. I am betting the school doesn’t own the property either, many high school fields are actually ‘owned’ by the city and the school maintains them.

      1. My kid’s public elementary school is adjacent to a small public “park” – really just a field with a fence around it where you can play baseball or soccer.

        During school hours it is closed to the public. Try to enter and you will indeed be ordered to leave. Refusing to do so will indeed result in arrest.

        And in the days post Parkland shooting, you really don’t want to push trespassing on school property. They are pretty insane on that topic.

        1. She claimed she had asthma, which is exempted from the mask mandate. The school discriminated her because she claimed a medical condition they refused to make accommodations for. So, your school claims to be able to shut down a public park, I am not sure that is legally defenisible, however, if they let one group use it but refused you, they are in the wrong, not you for breaking the rules.

          1. My high school used to complain and tried to get the sheriff’s to police people who watched the game from their houses because they didn’t pay an entry fee. The sheriff’s answer was to advise the school to put up some form of barrier other than the chain link fence. The school didn’t and still tried to get the city and the county to do something about it.

          2. The authorities seemed to conclude that she had no legitimate justification. Until she proves her claim, she’s just another dumbass jailbird.

            1. Hey, Kirksie, when you lick State boot like that, do you like some A-1 on your boot? Maybe HP, if you’re an Anglophile? Sriracha, for a little spice? Or BBQ sauce, like the hick you really are?

  14. >>That goes for mask-resistant Alecia D. Kitts herself


  15. “Tasing Moms Who Refuse Masks Does Not Make the World a Healthier Place”

    But it does do:
    1) did the cops go home safe that night?
    2) the cops got to use the taser (come on, you gave them the toys and then you whine when they use them on people)
    3) lets the cops get their jollies (you know they were high-fiving at the precinct afterwards and laughing at how she was jiggling – some may have wanted copies of the video for “research purposes” too)

  16. that’s irrelevant when you’re in somebody else’s domain.”
    except that in this case it is not someone else domain it is her by virtue of paying and that her kid is attending. Schools are not private property

    1. left out
      by virtue of paying taxes

    2. So you think that any citizen should be able to treat government property as if it were their own private property, without consequences?

      Or what exactly are you saying?

      1. Oregon was forced to follow its own constitution and allow concealed carry on all government owned properties (with the exception of courtrooms) over the vociferous objections of the state universities and public schools.

        This school should not have rules that violate the ADA or the governor’s mandate on medical exceptions for masks. Other than the school rule exceeding the mandate, what right do they have to make her leave public property. She was not initially causing a disruption.

        For Christ’s sake, she was with her family and properly socially distanced. Unless she was coughing on other folks, why did anyone make a deal about it.

        1. ‘For Christ’s sake, she was with her family and properly socially distanced. Unless she was coughing on other folks, why did anyone make a deal about it.’

          it’s remarkable that people can’t seem to understand this…

        2. To be fair, the cops eliminated the social distance component of her argument.

      2. It means that the ownership argument isn’t a solid one, especially if she does have asthma and mask wearing would be a danger to her health. The authorities have to be cautious when enforcing ownership rights. And have to make accommodations for medical problems in their policies.

    3. Not her kid’s school. He’s on the away team. Mom and ex husband were there to support the kid, but sat apart.

  17. They didn’t tase her because she refused to wear a mask, they tased her because she was trespassing and refused to leave.

    1. you think the mostly peaceful protesters care about the details?

    2. trespassing at a middle school football game.

      1. If you refuse the order of the property owner to leave, you’re trespassing, period. Whether it’s a “middle school football game” or someone’s back yard doesn’t matter. It also doesn’t matter whether it’s for bad conduct, violating a photography ban, offensive body odor, or not wearing a mask according to school and/or state requirements

        1. who owns the middle school? who owns the police?

        2. Unless that order to leave violate a law against discrimination.
          “Get out of here you (racial epithet deleted)” is not legal.
          Neither is refusing to build ADA compliant ramps and doorways.
          Neither is requiring “cloth face coverings” of a person exempt BY LAW from wearing “cloth face coverings”.

          1. Neither is requiring “cloth face coverings” of a person exempt BY LAW from wearing “cloth face coverings”.

            And while we’re on the subject, none of this is ‘by law’ it’s all ‘by assumed executive fiat using nebulous emergency powers’.

        3. ‘If you refuse the order of the property owner to leave, you’re trespassing, period.’

          property owner…? the entire school, and all it’s infrastructure and facilities, are paid for by people like the one you are accusing of trespassing…refund my property taxes, and I’ll abide by your stupid rules…

    3. she likely paid to get into the game, so no, not trespassing.

  18. Don’t worry. Harris promised us that Biden’s national mask mandate (his Day One promise from his first campaign ad) won’t be enforced nationally. Biden/Harris just want to set a good example. It’s not like they have an ex DA running the show or something.

    1. And she has never persecuted a journalist for exposing the truth about a campaign contributor, to the extent of violating state shield laws.

    2. How stupid is it that they are wearing masks in their campaign photos on their campaign ads??? Empty virtue signalling.

  19. This pretty much sums up my reaction… all of which was easy to glean just from watching the video, since it so neatly dovetails with so much of libertarian thought on such matters.

    But it is not playing that way everywhere.

    NBC played it as “hysterical mom refuses to wear mask, endangering the public”, with quite a bit of “this is Trump’s america” overtone.

    Which worked on my significant other. She’s pretty fed up with most of the lockdown stuff, particularly schools, but at the same time she is completely bought in on the mask bit. And she all-in on anything that is anti-Trump.

    So watching that video on NBC news, she was angry at the woman and took it as a sign that Trump is an asshole because people don’t want to wear masks.

    That is perhaps a majority opinion in the country.

    1. or your wife’s just irrational lol (I’m sorry it was an open barn door)

      1. She’s in the same boat with a huge chunk of the US electorate. (and a huge chunk of reason’s staff)

        1. I don’t believe mask wearers = a voting bloc. mho.

    2. The question is if your wife is all-in on the masks because she thinks they’re actually effective, or if she’s all-in because it’s ‘the polite thing to do’.

      There’s some difference there, in my view.

      1. She is all in on masks because she wants to be able to send the kids to school, go to football games and have a normal life. The idea being, just shut up and wear a stupid mask so we can get back to normal.

        There is a point to that…. it isn’t actually a huge ask. It is just obnoxious and inconvenient.

        The problem, of course, is that if it really does not work… then it is obnoxious and inconvenient for no reason at all.

        1. The gold stars on your sleeve aren’t really a big deal. Just wear the gold star already.

        2. That seems to be more or less the opinion a lot of the pro-mask people put out there that I’ve spoken to as well.

          It’s not about how effective any of the theater is, and they don’t even really care about the efficacy, it’s that if you want to go anywhere you’re forced to wear them so just shut up and follow orders.

          Certainly a nasty direction for society to take.

          1. Yeah, and that’s why I won’t go along with it any more than necessary to keep myself employed and fed. It is not good for our culture and is not good for our mental states (especially those of children who are being trained to see everyone as a potential danger). Every time I see someone talk about “new normal” I want to scream. This cannot be allowed to become normal. Everyone needs to start ignoring this shit as much as they can. There is no virtue in obeying unjust laws or ridiculous social pressure. And anywhere that isn’t currently seeing a significant outbreak (and I mean one where people are actually sick in large numbers), it’s all absurd.

            1. Amusingly, the only time I’ve worn a mask thus far is to buy pot from a dispensary in Denver. Go figure.

        3. “If we slow the spread we’ll be done faster!”

        4. Forcing people to wear an object that impairs their breathing is hardly getting “back to normal.”

          1. Watching people wear them outside in the rain makes me wonder if anyone knows what waterboarding is.

    3. Let your significant other know the following CDC statement for everything BUT the Communist Chinese Virus.

      “Background; Masks are not usually recommended in non-healthcare settings; however, this guidance provides other strategies for limiting the spread of influenza viruses in the community.
      Unvaccinated Asymptomatic Persons, Including Those at High Risk for Influenza Complications
      No recommendation can be made at this time for mask use in the community by asymptomatic persons, including those at high risk for complications, to prevent exposure to influenza viruses.”

      So somehow, never explained at all by anyone, the Communist Chinese virus alone of all viruses can be stopped by a “cloth face covering” ranging from a single layer of cheesecloth to a doubled over bath towel. Note also that the CDC specifically says “ordinary” people should NOT wear a real surgical N95 mask that actually would stop the virus; this are for professionals only.

      1. You would think we would know the answer to this by now. Densely populated cities in Asia like Tokyo have commonly used masks in public for decades. You would think there was ample time to gather data on the topic.

        1. Try comparing flu rates in Japan and the United States. If face masks were effective, we would see significantly lower flu deaths in Japan. In fact, it is the opposite.

          1. Japan has a significantly higher population density (and older, if I recall). Those would both be much larger factors confounding the analysis.

            1. The US has 632 Covid deaths per 1M pop. In Japan this number is 12–53 times lower. Despite higher population density. If face masks have any contribution to lowering Covid deaths by more than 50 times, why doesn’t it have effect on the flu?

              1. It’s not masks, it genetics and robust immune systems acquired from exposure to high population density.

                1. And also probably more prior exposure to similar viruses. A lot of the pacific rim has relatively low death rates.

    4. ‘That is perhaps a majority opinion in the country.’

      females, perhaps…

  20. “It’s their property so they make the rules. If they want you to wear a face mask, or a propeller beanie, or to take off your shoes, you should comply or leave. That’s just good manners. Throwing a hissy fit because a host asks you to do something you don’t want to do in their facility isn’t an option.”

    This is only true for PRIVATE property. I suppose you think the jews were just supposed to walk into the ovens at Auschwitz when the nazis asked nicely because it was their property? Now that’s just good manners!

    I’ll buy another subscription to Reason when they start hiring libertarian writers again.

    1. Wow… that’s quite the non sequitur.

      Yes, you can be charged with trespassing on publicly owned property, including a school.

      1. ‘Yes, you can be charged with trespassing on publicly owned property, including a school.’

        in no way, shape, or form does sitting and watching a game in a stadium provided for the very purpose of sitting and watching a game qualify as trespassing…face it, stupid wannabe tyrants have gone way over the line they were authorized to enforce, and started making up rules they think they have permission to carry out…

    2. “This is only true for PRIVATE property.”

      No it is true for any property. Our covenant with the government allows them to own property and manage it as well, including setting up rules that we may or may not agree with. Luckily, as a publicly owned facility, we have a mechanism defined in the same covenant to get the government to change how it manages that property.

    3. On public property, you have to follow lawful orders.

      Ordering you to wear a mask is stupid, but it is lawful. In fact, in many places, property owners (public or private) are required to enforce mask wearing.

      1. Easier critique:

        Try going to the publicly owned prison and see if you get to decide where you are allowed to go.

        Or a publicly owned military base.

        Or a publicly owned sewage treatment plant.

        Or a publicly owned garbage collection facility.

        Or a publicly owned power plant.

        I think that you will find that “Public” and “I can do whatever I want because I own it” are not the same thing.

        1. One might note that was the controversy surrounding the Bundy case.

          1. A big part…. wasn’t it also a taking case – in that revoking generations old grazing rights cost them something that they were entitled to?

            Wikipedia seems to have some different definitions than my recollection, but I did not follow it closely. Basically it claims that the government put restrictions on the land he was using because of a tortoise protection deal. He refused to pay his grazing fees in protest and got his permit cancelled. He refused offers to renew his permit, saying that the feds could not own land. The feds and the courts disagreed.

            Oddly, the wiki reports that he owed more in unpaid fees than all other cattle grazers combined. Apparently he was the only one refusing to pay but continuing to graze at any scale for any period of time. (over a million for Bundy, vs $237k for the entire remainder of the US)

            It seems like this may have been a bit like the BLM version of police shootings… the facts I was told at the time might vary a bit from the actual facts of the case.

            1. …this may have been a bit like the BLM version of police shootings… the facts I was told at the time might vary a bit from the actual facts of the case.

              This is funny, perhaps intentionally, because it was the ‘real’ BLM (Bureau of Land Management) shooting at people for ‘peacefully occupying’ a Federal building.

              Regardless of any details, at heart it was a case dealing with ‘doing what you want’ on Federally owned land which seems an appropriate comparison.

      2. Actually, in this case the order was illegal, as the woman was specifically exempt by statute from wearing a “cloth face covering”.

        Would you consider it legal for the cops to order a wheelchair bound individual to walk across the terminal to go through a security check?

        1. Well, obviously the property owner and she disagreed on the legality of the order; we have courts to resolve such questions. She doesn’t get to unilaterally decide legality for herself when there is a dispute.

          1. There isn’t a dispute. The order specifically exempted people with medical conditions. This is more akin to them telling a paraplegic to leave because their wheelchair takes up to much room.

            1. But she was not arrested for violating the order.

              The facility had a mask mandate of their own. (based on the state mandate). The penalty for violating their mandate was being told to leave.

              That is the distinction. Her argument was that their requirement was erroneous. They declined to consider her arguments.

              There really is no mechanism for adjudicating that dispute at the time. If they won’t listen, she’s out of luck. Any action taken to correct that decision would have to come later.

              1. And under the ADA they are required to provide accommodations. So them ordering her to leave without providing accomodations is a violation of the state mandate and the ADA act. So once again, the school is at fault here.

                1. You cannot enforce ADA claims by trespassing.

                  Furthermore, the ADA accommodation could consist of requiring her to wear a face shield instead of a mask.

                  Finally, the decision of what constitutes a reasonable accommodation on government property rests solely with the responsible government officials.

                  So, no valid ADA claim.

              2. And thus the arrest was in violation to an order that was illegal. So fruit from the poisoned tree.

                1. That principle refers to something else.

            2. Look, when the property owner tells you to leave, you have to leave. No ifs or buts. It doesn’t matter whether the property owner is private or the government. If you think this violates the ADA or some other law, you can sue them for a violation of the law afterwards. If you insist on staying, they can treat you like a trespasser.

              This person didn’t get tased for being a mom or for not wearing a mask, she got tased because she resisted removal from a property after the property owner told her to leave.

      3. >>required to enforce mask wearing

        still have a choice.

        1. And the mandate exempts medical conditions. So unless the school could prove she didn’t have asthma, they were violating the mandate.

          1. The school can impose its own, stricter rules if they like.

            1. Seems to me that public schools are made to follow ADA all the time, with things like elevators and wheelchair ramps. So, if schools follow the ADA in part, seems like they should follow it in full.

      4. ‘Ordering you to wear a mask is stupid, but it is lawful.’

        the mandate (not a law, by the way, which is a regulation enacted by a legislative body) stipulates mask wearing outside only if social distancing cannot be maintained, which in this case, it was…

        why can’t people understand that the woman was in fact complying with the mask mandate as stated…?

        1. It doesn’t matter what the state or local mask mandate is, the school and its agents can set stricter mandates if they choose, and people have to comply with it.

        2. Thank you.

      5. No, it wasnt’ lawful. She was in compliance with two separate exemptions from the Ohio mask mandate.

  21. Remember the pics of Fauci not wearing a mask at the baseball game with no consequences? Good times.

    1. Had ge been asked to leave and refused, based on a medical condition that exempted him from wearing a mask, I’m sure he would have been tased too. Positive.

    2. The most fun was the first pitch; it broke hard left, and socially distanced.

  22. If everyone wasn’t so hell-bent on getting their way, a reasonable accommodation could easily have been reached. There was a metric crap-ton of free space available. It was outside, for crying out loud.

    But school officials almost never think that way. They got fixated on “wear a mask or leave”.

    She got fixated on “I don’t have to wear a mask”.

    The cops got fixated on “do as we say or you will be arrested with all necessary force”.

    If anyone had just stopped and looked at the situation, it would have been really easy to say “why don’t you go stand over there where nobody else is nearby?”

    When you watch the videos of these type of confrontations, there is usually a way out. Several ways out, in fact. Ways that are ignored by all participants.

    So I suppose that is the real lesson here. Don’t get married to any one solution. Don’t get tunnel vision. Always be prepared to accept an alternate solution.

    Life is a lot more pleasant if you are able to do that.

    1. I agree. Having a separate area of the stadium reserved for black people is a reasonable accommodation vs. the owner disallowing black people from entering their property.

      Wait, what were we talking about again?

      1. Nothing remotely related to that.

        Might be closer to having a smoking vs non-smoking section.

        1. But this is not a class. It is one lady who did not want to do what they were requiring that she do.

          Still, if you were going to make an analogy, racial segregation was not at all relevant.

          1. I might go with “Brazil”, with out of control bureaucracy controlling things…

          2. Sure it’s relevant. We’re singling out a class of people, defined as those who don’t want to wear masks, and telling them they are a subclass of people without the same rights and privilege’s as someone that does wear a mask.

            It’s similar in that it’s a lawful prohibition on how, and in what circumstances, a business is allowed to refuse service.

            Last I checked, the ADA doesn’t allow you to discriminate against people for health conditions such as asthma, and it would appear that requiring people with asthma who cannot tolerate a mask to entirely eschew public life would fall into that category.

            Sure, one can make the argument that a racial class is far more offensive and something that is inherently immutable thus more justified, but a health condition could also be said to be inherently immutable, depending on condition, so the same arguments would appear to apply.

            1. The pre-existing condition class

            2. Under the ADA, she can be required to wear a face shield. Furthermore, on government property, ADA decisions are up to government officials. ADA claims are adjudicated in court, not through trespassing.

              In any case, she wasn’t tased for not wearing a mask, she was tased for resisting an order to leave the premises.

    2. If anyone had just stopped and looked at the situation, it would have been really easy to say “why don’t you go stand over there where nobody else is nearby?”

      She was already distanced from other groups by more than the distance required by the state mandate. The only ones near her were in her family unit, which is allowed. They should have just left her alone.

  23. Was at my kiddo’s varsity football game this past Friday. We all had to wear masks. Midway through first quarter I’d say 10-20% had taken masks off me included, the others had their noses poking out, under their chin, constantly touching the mask, etc. By half-time, over 50% had no mask on, by the 4th quarter 90% were not wearing mask or again not wearing it correctly. The masks are a total waste of time. If I would have been questioned by the mask gestapo aka booster club volunteers aka Karen’s, I had my almost empty Dr. Pepper and chip bag of crumbs by me to say I was “eating/drinking” and to fuck off!

    1. Mask mandates? Modern day cargo cult.

    2. I’d have asked you to leave simply for drinking a Dr. Pepper. Commie.

    3. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has admitted that the organization has deceived the public throughout the entire coronavirus pandemic, backtracking on their claim that COVID-19 is an airborne virus.

      “CDC is currently updating its recommendations regarding airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2,” the CDC explained in a note published earlier this week.

      “This was an error on the part of our agency and I apologize on behalf of the CDC,” said John Brooks, chief medical officer for the CDC’s COVID-19 Emergency Response, while on a call with medical professionals on Monday.”

      If the masks were completely useless before….well it’s time to drop this superstitious charade once and for all.

      No one uses it right and they never will. And thank God. Every single pro-masker that added to the stress of this mystery can straight off go to hell. It was NEVER about science.

      1. That story seems to lead back to occurrences that argue the exact opposite – that the Trump administration has forced the CDC to change their conclusions in order to facilitate reopening.

    4. I have heard several public health officials saying masks are only for indoors when you cannot be more than 6 feet apart.

      So outdoors, no mask.

      Indoors and 12 feet apart…. no mask.

      But who knows. They keep changing the objective of this entire exercise, so how can anyone possibly devise a “safety” scheme?

      Remember – the official government plan endorsed by every public health organization in the world (except Sweden) was to “flatten the curve”, reducing the peak number of cases so that the hospitals would not be overwhelmed. The total number of cases would be the same – they would just be spread out over a greater time.

      For some reason almost every public health official in the US tossed that entire concept out the window in short order, and we have only been talking about “keeping transmission rates low” or “preventing people from catching it”. Both of which were not anywhere on the agenda, knowing that without a vaccine, a widely circulating and highly contagious virus could not be contained.

      1. >>They keep changing the objective of this entire exercise

        because it’s not science it’s policy.

      2. That’s how the law works here. Inside if you can’t keep six feet but of course they mandated you wear it anyway. It’s just inconsistent.

      3. Just sit down and shut up. That’s what we’ve all be indoctrinated to since government elementary schools. Looks like it worked on most people. The resistant will be assimilated or marginalized.

      4. Even Sweden was trying to flatten the curve. They just didn’t think they needed to fuck everyone’s life up to do it.

  24. Causing psychic injuries to those around you has always been a crime, in some form or another, in societies where popular delusions were indistinguishable from facts.

    So long as the belief persists that unmasked people are literally placing others at a serious risk of death, the circus of absurd arrests and enforcement measures will never cease.

    1. Governments are going to find out just how stupid their mandates were because of that.

      1. That will happen on April 15, 2021.

  25. Simple solution, create two seating selections based on wearing masks: a science ignorant section and a lil bitch section. And yes call them that and watch the fun while people sort out which is which.

  26. Tasing Moms Who Refuse Masks

    This is going to show up on Pornhub categories in the next couple of days, isn’t it.

    1. Funny joke,… but is there anything that isn’t already a pornhub category?

    2. My wife refused to wear a mask and now she’s in a gangbang for punishment!

      1. Her face will be covered at the end of the video.

  27. “We could find definitive evidence tomorrow that masks help to reduce the spread of COVID-19”

    Actually, you can not. Look at any country, state, province that introduced face mask mandates. Nowhere did the face masks have any effect on the spread of coronavirus.
    For example,

    1. I don’t think those graphs show what he thinks they show.

      They show that the virus will spread in the face of a mask mandate.

      They do not show that the mask mandate has no effect. In fact, many of those graphs show a very slow rise or a small rise and decline followed by a second rise.

      That data could easily be the result of mask mandates mitigating the spread to some degree.

      1. Give me a clear example where a mask mandate changed the trajectory of infection. Because I can keep posting links to longitudinal analysis displaying zero effect of masks.

        1. If masks have a small effect – say 10% – on the rate of transmission, it would be hard to tease out from all the other actions that affect the growth rate of cases.

          If it took R=2.3 to R=2.19, would you be able to see it in those graphs? Would closing schools and public gatherings swamp that effect?

          1. But might that effect reduce the peak of ICU hospitalizations from 1,700 to 1,500 in a city with a capacity of 1,600 ICU beds?

            All of that would be really difficult to determine with any certainty.

          2. In other words you cannot present a single example where the beneficial effect of face masks is clear and unambiguous. Even though we have hundreds of countries, states, counties with different policies. Plenty to choose from. There must be an example where everything else stayed the same except for masks. Instead we have numerous examples of European countries (France, Spain) that introduced face mandates (as well as other social distancing measures) over the summer and yet their cases went through the roof.

            I analyze economic data and then write expert reports for a living. So, I’m quite aware of how the effect of a certain factor can be teased out. But if, for example, you argue that a contract provision is, say, anti-competitive and harms the plaintiff. It’s hard to convince the jury that the provision was harmful if the plaintiff market share or revenue grew after the provision went into effect.

          3. 10% is a huge effect, we’d be talking more in the ballpark of decimals friend.

        2. This article is very good. It shows an analysis of what does not correlate with cases. They should have used the transmission rate, not infections, new cases or deaths.

          It argues something that I’ve been arguing as well – that the virus is going to spread through the population.

          But it does not explain why cases in some areas peaked much more sharply than others, or why death rates vary so widely.

          1. But it does not explain why cases in some areas peaked much more sharply than others, or why death rates vary so widely.
            Some places killed their own people.

          2. And I hope people figure those things out some day. But the emergency is over in most places and this shit needs to stop.

            1. I hope so.

              We are fighting to get our kids back in school right now. Many kids are doing fine remotely. Some of our friends are actually doing better that way and they are going to keep their kids at home.

              Mine are not. They need the classroom competition to reach their potential. They need a connection with a teacher. So this is not working for them.

              They are all doing OK on grades, but they are nowhere close to reaching my personal standards for them – and that is all down to this interminable lockdown.

    2. >>have any effect on the spread of coronavirus

      can barely correctly tell us who’s *had* coronavirus.

  28. All laws are enforced by men with guns (and evidently edicts from on high as well).

    If we don’t want people to be assaulted for the ‘crime’ of not wearing a mask, allow them to not wear masks. By mandating it, you’re ALSO assuring there will be videos like this one, or the woman on the subway in NYC a few months ago.

    1. ‘If we don’t want people to be assaulted for the ‘crime’ of not wearing a mask, allow them to not wear masks.’

      except that a very stupid and sizeable segment of our society wants exactly that, for non maskers to be assaulted…

      1. That’s the most depressing thing. It only took mask edicts to turn Americans into Nazis.

      2. One locally had another member of the public draw a gun on them. Thankfully, Yosemite Sam is being charged.

        1. “Thankfully”? Sounds like you wanted one of the “unbelievers” to be punished, for their wickedness. You know, “Any stick to beat a dog,” and all that.

  29. Sure a property owner can make any rule they like. That doesn’t make the rule a smart one. Any business owner who requires a mask unless forced to by the state is a fool and is asking for something like this to happen

    1. Sure a property owner can make any rule they like.

      Except they can’t, as a matter of Federal and State law. The Civil Rights Act, the American’s with Disabilities Act, etc. state very clearly that there are limits on the rules a property owner can put in place and these would appear to run afoul of at least the ADA, if not others.

      Now, we may not like those rules and may even think they’re illegitimate but that’s a separate conversation in my view.

      1. And, in the vein of what laws actually exist, it’s curious that while each ‘mask’ guidance has medical exceptions I haven’t seen anything clear on what the procedure is for getting a waiver from those requirements if you have a legitimate disability in the eyes of the state. They say there’s an exception, and may even outline who would meet that exception, but then are fairly opaque on how such a waiver would function or even who can grant one based on what criteria.

        They’re basically saying there are people who should be exempted for medical reasons, but they have no idea who and no idea how to enforce it. So we get blanket enforcement of a bad rule, and some people will be crushed as a consequence in spite of so-called ‘settled law’.

      2. True enough. I was speaking more in the abstract of what they should be able to do.

        1. I’d agree, I just argue the classically liberal standpoint because I can in this particular instance and still win the argument against the progressive view. I take it as something of a given that we’d agree on the more basic point of should they.

      3. Violations of the ADA are handled by courts; they don’t give you license to trespass.

        Under the ADA, you don’t get an automatic right “not to wear a mask”, you only get reasonable accommodations. And on government property, that’s determined by government alone.

  30. ” That’s just good manners. ”

    It’s not ‘just good manners.’ It is a legal requirement. Failure to comply constitutes a violation of health-related orders, defiant or criminal trespass (after a request to comply), or both.

    Without a suggestion regarding how the authorities should have arranged compliance or removal, this article is pointless. Neither society nor the property owner is obligated to appease belligerent ignorance.

    1. who’s ^^^ bending over today?

    2. Maybe such things should be left between the property owner and the asshole?

      When you have to hire goons yourself to eject people you might be willing to come to a non-violent compromise

      But of course, you being a good little fascist, can’t accept anything not within the state.

    3. She stated she was asthmatic which is exempted from wearing a mask under the mandate. So the school was breaking the mandate not her. Also, they likely broke the ADA, an actual federal law that requires reasonable axcomadations for people with health conditions. Not only an authoritarian but you also appear to be arbitrary you which rules you want the authorities to enforce. Next you’ll be screaming for people’s papers, just like all Nazi Scum.

      1. Let’s see whether the belligerently ignorant woman was truthful about her ostensible justification for not wearing a mask and causing a scene.

        Disaffected clingers just can’t avoid taking the anti-social, alienated, misfit side of every issue.

  31. Throwing a hissy fit because a host asks you to do something you don’t want to do in their facility isn’t an option.

    So, Rosa Parks should have just shut up and surrendered her seat?

    1. Point, set, match.

      When irate libs berate me for saying I’ll refuse to take a rushed COVID vaccine, I just reply, “My body. My choice.”

    2. It’s interesting how injustice imposed on only a segment of the population seems less acceptable to a lot of people than a similar injustice imposed on the whole population. I can sort of understand the gut feeling. But by any reasonable objective measure, it really is worse. Fairness is kind of a weird concept sometimes.

      1. Fairness is kind of a weird concept sometimes.

        But leftism is based on that weirdness. In their world, it’s more just for all of us to be miserable together than for a few of us to be struggling while most others are comfortable.

      2. Not even that if she is truly an asthmatic who can’t for health reasons wear a mask, this is much more similar to Rosa Parks than not.

        1. It doesn’t matter if she’s asthmatic. She’s being persecuted for having minority beliefs.

    3. Well, if you are going to practice civil disobedience, prepare for getting tased. Is it worth it?

      1. Ask her, I guess. Everyone needs to make that judgement for himself.

  32. Pour encourager les autres.

  33. Every person that justified the police action here needs to be tased themselves. Preferably in the nuts/vag.

  34. “Violent enforcement should be reserved for serious matters, not for failures of hygiene and good manners.”

    How do you propose to enforce without violence? Say pretty please with sugar on top?

    1. Nobody said there would be enforcement without violence.

      Only that such violence should be reserved for serious matters.

      If it’s not serious then we shouldn’t bother with state enforcement.

      1. Who defines “serious?”

        1. The NAP.

        2. Who defines “serious?”

          In this case, the cops.

          “Sorry, we can’t enforce trespass against against a citizen in a public venue once admission has been paid unless there is a serious offense being committed. You need to stop these people at the gate and/or ban them from future admission, but we can’t help you today. We are not the ‘mask police’.”

          I understand the incident wasn’t in Texas, but the governor’s mandate here specifically stated that citizens could not be arrested for mask violations. Seems like the nanny state Karens can get around even that simply by saying ‘we don’t want you here, you are trespassing’. Cops shouldn’t fall for this shit.

          The sad thing is this poor football-mom was peacefully protesting.
          The progs are cheering that she got tased instead of respecting her voice. They deserve to burn in hell.

        3. Easy. Is it worth killing someone who refuses to comply. If it isn’t, then it isn’t serious. Understand every law comes with the threat of death. It may only threaten jail or fines explicitly, but implicit in that threat is the threat of death if you resist the police who come to enforce those things.

          1. Why are so few people able to understand this?

      2. Yeah, no, any law is toothless without enforcement. We have a government of laws, not of men, which is why we cannot leave it up to police officers to choose which laws they prefer to enforce.

        1. The tooth, the whole tooth and nothing but the tooth.

        2. You don’t want to live in the nightmarish world where police strictly enforce every law. Thank god they pick and choose.

      3. To be clear, you do not believe police should enforce trespassing laws?


        1. Not as bad as believing someone should be tazed for not wearing a useless mask on their face, while on property they’re forced to pay for, through taxes, by people whose salaries they’re forced to pay, again, through taxes. And NOYB2 and Escher Enigma are satisfied with that.

  35. I don’t get it. Are you saying that the state has no business enforcing laws against trespass?

    1. Public/government property is subject to different rules than private property and rightly so, I think. A government agency must follow relevant laws and respect constitutional rights.
      Who was asking this woman to leave and what authority did they have to speak for the owner of the property (which is some governmental entity)? This isn’t like private property where the whim of the owner is the rule.

  36. “The whole good cop/bad cop question can be disposed of much more decisively. We need not enumerate what proportion of cops appears to be good or listen to someone’s anecdote about his Uncle Charlie, an allegedly good cop. We need only consider the following: (1) a cop’s job is to enforce the laws, all of them; (2) many of the laws are manifestly unjust, and some are even cruel and wicked; (3) therefore every cop has agreed to act as an enforcer for laws that are manifestly unjust or even cruel and wicked. There are no good cops.” ~Robert Higgs

  37. Another false equivalency from the reason staff, which I am beginning to assume is a new and mandated component in their reporting. Talk about both-sides-ism…

    As the article points out, the woman was sitting with close family in an outdoor setting where transmission of the virus is unlikely (we think – nobody appears to actually know). But she should have complied with ridiculous rules?

    Second, a school is not a private actor the way a Target store is. Public schools get taxpayer funding, so this is not just complying with the preferences of a local business. (If this was a private school and I am overlooking that, apologies.)

    Reason seems to be fervently pro-mask but also complains about the overcriminalization of our daily lives. This is a fantastic example of an immoral and irrational law: isn’t refusing to follow an irrational and unjustified law that requires citizens to purchase and wear face coverings an act of civil disobedience on some level?

    Some people make fun of those who refuse to wear a mask, suggesting it is a “minor inconvenience.” As someone with asthma, I can assure you it is more than that. These cloth masks that are washable are also difficult to breathe through. I don’t have the money to keep ordering boxes full of surgical masks from unknown manufacturers leaving me without the ability to determine whether or not I am hotboxing factory dust. Maybe even something deadly like asbestos.

    As an immigration attorney, I can promise you that the masks also make communication extremely difficult. People with heavy accents are trying to talk to me while I try to respond through a mask as thick as a dishtowel. Note that our conversations rely on details being correct or legal cases fail. But you know, COVID, so, while reason doesn’t like laws about it, they do support mandatory use of masks, just minus the enforcement part?

    Come on – these masks are little more than virtue signaling and public health theatre. Reason has no problem calling out the TSA for similar measures. Why do we pretend masks are clearly effective? There are no conclusive studies.

    I consider the mask requirement to be a violation of my right to self-expression. A high percentage of communication is non-verbal, and the masks make the verbal part extremely difficult. The way you present yourself is a form of communication.

    Honestly, at this point, I have tired of making the same points over and over and over. I am tired of the writers at reason blindly supporting masks as essential for preventing the spread of the virus. Do they advocate for masks as the new normal? As a permanent requirement? Because – spoiler alert – the virus will not disappear. If we take the masks off, cases will rise. This is true whether we do it now or in two years. Perhaps there will be a cure (although cures for viruses are rare given how often they mutate), or a 100% effective vaccine (dream on). Until then, must we all remain quiet and submissive and masked?

    Police release rioters as soon as they catch them, but somehow they have the time to wrestle with and tase a mom in front of her children at an outdoor event. A minister is arrested in front of a congregation while they sing hymns outdoors. A douche throws a molotov cocktail at a cop? No biggie.

    This may be my last comment at reason ever (probably not). If it is, that’s because it is always the same argument, always the same discussion, always the same articles and posts and comments and insults and bullshit.

    In the midst of this madness (and make no mistake – that’s what this is: laws based on shallow scientific “maybes,” locking up soccer moms and leaving violent protesters to roam the streets, the human arrogance attend to the belief that we have the power to conquer nature), there is so much human suffering that gets absolutely no attention.

    Suicide rates will rise. I have family that I cannot leave behind, and I do not want to to anything that would hurt them. But if it were not for them, seeking an exit from this insane world would be something I considered seriously. I’ve had an interesting and cool life. I see no new joy or adventure in my future. Why bother? I no longer live; I merely exist. But nobody cares about that kind of human suffering. I have no local friends, and political extremes have alienated me from the people I have known and loved for years. Blaming Trump would be easy, but I don’t. I am angry at the Republicans who gave us Trump, but I am also an individualist. We, each of us, is responsible for how we respond to the Trump presidency. Don’t tell me that the violence committed by angry individuals is Trump’s fault; they have a choice in how to respond.

    I guess the points are: when even Reason is supporting extreme government action (and living in fantasy land where masks can be mandated without enforcement), when masks just seem stupid As The World Burns, and there seem to be no allies in the realm of the individualists, it is easy to lose hope.

    I am a mess. More than six months of social isolation has taken its toll, and there is no end in sight. Hey, it was naughty of the police to tase the nice lady, but they gave her a chance to comply with their bullshit regulation, so she is as much at fault as anyone else here.

    Worst of all, I cannot renew my passport. Because that elderly gentleman checking my groceries at Target is essential, but DOS employees who issue passports can’t be bothered to show up because Covid are not considered essential, I am a US citizen that is, for all intents and purposes, trapped in this country. I want to leave so badly, and I cannot.

    The problem with walls is that they may be built with the intention of keeping people out, but they can be used to keep people in as well.

    I’m falling apart. I can call suicide hotlines or mental health services, but there is jack shit they can do about the current situation. Never in my life as an American have I felt that I have no choice, no power, no ability to improve my situation.

    I recognize that this is the rant of a woman in pain, but I have to believe there are others. And that there are libertarians who have fallen victim to the idea that mankind can control nature. Either we wear our masks forever, or we take them off and let the virus run its course. This is not a clear “either/or” because we cannot wear masks forever.

    What is the goal? When can we come out and remove our masks? Nobody will even hazard a guess. Nobody in power has shit to say about that. Nope – it’s just masks and dots on the floor for eternity I suppose.

    Why would anyone who has no family of their own, nobody depending on them, care to keep living in this insane world? With no end in sight?

    So good on the woman who refused to wear a mask. It was once a law that black people could not eat at the same lunch counter as whites. Blacks were arrested defying that bullshit, and were appropriately regarded as heroes. They had “science” back then, too. It isn’t the same, but it’s the same category: refuse to wear a mask in a situation where no scientist will tell you it is useful, and you go to jail and get tased in front of your children. And even Reason will place some amount of the blame at your feet.

    “Look, those black folks knew it was illegal to sit at that lunch counter. The resisted repeated polite requests to leave, so when they were finally arrested, they were getting what they deserved.” Is that what Reason would publish now?

    Again I acknowledge that the moral implications are not the same. But we lose our freedoms incrementally, not all at once. There will be more lockdowns. There will be more arrests for irrational mask mandates and no prosecution for those actually burning down buildings.

    No wonder those who try to comply but recognize the futility of this experiment in virus containment is going to fail feel so ignored, unimportant, neglected, and often insulted.

    Isn’t libertarianism supposed to focus on individual rights and the individual’s decision to choose their level of risk?

    I’ll shut up now. But I am at the end of my rope. I don’t think I am alone.

    1. No, you are not alone. I’m fortunate to have a good group of friends who aren’t going along with all the bullshit, so I have things to live for and look forward to. But the state of things is a constant source of anxiety and stress. Things are so clearly wrong in a really bad way, but what the fuck are we supposed to do? I have never been so disappointed and disgusted with people.
      I was sure that people would be done with this by now. What the fuck is wrong with people? I try to be a bit optimistic, but it gets harder as time goes on and people are still begging to be subjected to more foolish rules and restrictions that are ruining our lives and culture.

    2. You are definitely not alone. I can empathize with everything you said.

    3. Fantastic post. Fellow lawyer here and I sympathize. I’m in Michigan and my headsspins daily at the level of irrational, hypocritical behavior. All I can say is hang in there.

    4. Please try to hang on until after the election.
      (probably weeks after the election)
      There is a fifty-fifty chance the results will allow the country to regain it’s senses. If not, dying in the revolution will be better than suicide.

      1. This election, by design, is going to be hot mess. We will never know who actually won. We won’t be getting “the results”—ever.

        Dying in the resulting civil war is likely to be horrible. It’s not that hard to die peacefully at home before it comes to that.

  38. this: “that’s irrelevant when you’re in somebody else’s domain. It’s their property so they make the rules”

    You are forgetting ONE very critical point:

    that was PUBLI
    C SCHOOL property, which means it BELONGS to the PUBLIC With what other “unsafe” kids were they tossed?

    As to the Moscow incident, there is one detail you conveiniently leave off:

    the STATE government had, just the week previously ,declared mask rules to no longer bind anywhere in the state. The corporatioin of the City of Moscow Idaho IS in fact subject to that decree. The city had stubbonroy refused to comply, and that is why those folks were there in the car park. to seek redress of their grievence. They may have been in violatioin of the Moscow City PoohBahs’ stated perferences, but those stated perferences were nonger binding under law, as their superior and inclusive jurisdiction, the State of Idaho, had declared their maskk mandate unlawful.

    So WHO should have been arrested?
    Get it right. This maskk nonsense is tyhranny in our faces… and NEED S to be ignored, violated, contested inthe courts (Pennsylvanis
    a outcome was a very good one….)

    The one guy being hauled away in cuffs calmly informed his captors that they were doing the wrong thing, and should be aashamed of themselves for following ilegal orders from the town council. He is correct. I hpe they sue… until such petty jurisdictions get their hands slapped hars, or taken out behind the woodshed for some “reeducatio, this garbage will continue.

    1. that was PUBLIC SCHOOL property, which means it BELONGS to the PUBLIC
      I encourage you to test your knowledge of trespassing law as it relates to public property by going to any given local elementary school and insisting you have the right to wander into any given class room while it’s in use, and staying as long as you like.

    2. That’s a lie you learned in public school, probably. Some kind of “government is the things we do together”, commie bullshit. It belongs to the government, which is a very different thing from “the public”. Once they take your money, it’s theirs because FYTW.

  39. What a crock! Manners ain’t got nothing to do with it. She was out in the open and away from others except for the people she was with. All those others have no right to demand that she wear a mask. If they are afraid of catching something, then they should stay home and not risk going out. Masking is not a law…no laws have been passed by any legislature. If this woman wants to go anywhere without a mask, she can do so and then the risk is upon her. You can never prove how anyone got sick from a virus. It’s all conjecture. I do not support any government forcing us to do anything since there is no proof their actions save lives. What about the lives lost from isolation, suicides, bad medical practice, bad drugs, and dozens of other causes we will never hear about in the news?

  40. This has to be the most authoritarian article that I have read on Reason (so far) along with most of the commenters. So a rule dictated by an appointed bureaucrat suddenly is justifiably enforced with violence? I think I’ll check Huffington Post for a more libertarian angle.

  41. Two things:

    ONE: I’ve had a bad day and let my frustration fly, and people here were kind to me. Nary a troll – this gives me hope. Also thank you to those who offered support and empathy.

    TWO: Let’s make tomorrow’s debate a drinking game. It’s Narcissism vs. Senility! Every time Biden loses track of what he’s saying and resorts to, “You know, I mean, you know what I’m talking about, it’s just, I mean, you know, right? Anyway…” DRINK! Every time Trump resorts to a personal attack, DRINK!

    (We are all going to be very drunk.)

  42. Odd.

    I did a quick search on “Calvin Munerlyn”, the security guard who was killed by anti-maskers, and I couldn’t find an article on Reason.

    So two possibilities.
    (A) Reason’s search function is shit
    (B) Reason never published an article about a security guard who asked someone to put a mask on, and was rewarded by her family returning 20 minutes later to shoot him in the face.

    And that’s not even the only case where an anti-masker has shot a store employee this year for asking them to wear a mask.

    Surely it must be (A), because Reason would never fail to report on right-wing violence, would it?

    1. Right-wing violence?

      Granted, the right is far more diverse then the left these days, but I’d be a bit surprised if the perpetrators self-identify as “right-wing”.

  43. Every month start earning more cash from $20,000 to $24,000 by working very simple j0b 0nline from home. I have earned last month $23159 from this by just doing this 0nline w0rk for maximum 3 to 4 hrs a day using my laptop.

  44. Start now earning extra $16,750 to $19,000 per month by doing an easy home based job in part time only. Last month i have got my 3rd paycheck of $17652 by giving this job only 3 hrs a day online on my Mobile. Every person can now get this today and makes extra cash by follow details her==► Read More

  45. I am a retired surgeon. I wore surgical masks through my career daily. Despite the data, there is no guarantee that surgical masks will ABSOLUTELY prevent Covid transmission.

    That said, most of the political authorities who control our states believe they will. I WEAR MASKS IN CLOSED SPACES BECAUSE I WANT PEOPLE TO GET BACK TO WORK AND KEEP STORES OPEN.

    So wearing masks for me is more of a “worker solidarity statement” than a health issue.

    Even if you are old, you CAN encourage your immune system to effectively battle not just SARS 2 Novel Corona Virus, but others as well:

    1. Vit D 3, 2000 IU per day
    2. Quercetin 500 mgms per day
    3. Melatonin 5 mgms at nigh
    4. One Costco adult multivitamin per day
    5. 1 additional zinc lozenge 11mgs per day

    If you are over 50 and obese you may need a higher Vitamin D 3 dose. But this is a good place to start.

    Rather than screaming at each other, I wanted my post to CONTRIBUTE to your health.

    If you are not doing this, START NOW. Even if you contract Covid, you have a very good chance of fighting it off. Dr. Zelenko put 100 Orthodox Jewish people in NY on this, and despite not practicing any social isolation, NONE got sick.

    I wanted this post to contribute something here, rather than another rant. This is not my first epidemic. I was a practicing surgeon during the HIV AID’s epidemic.

    Sanjosemike (no longer in CA)
    Retired surgeon

  46. the problem with laws and regulations over every little detail of our life is that people lose respect for the law and that includes the ones that really do benefit us all.

  47. Here’s the thing: while there’s debate over the effectiveness of masks—the CDC is for them, while the World Health Organization remains lukewarm—that’s irrelevant when you’re in somebody else’s domain. It’s their property so they make the rules. If they want you to wear a face mask, or a propeller beanie, or to take off your shoes, you should comply or leave. That’s just good manners. Throwing a hissy fit because a host asks you to do something you don’t want to do in their facility isn’t an option.

    Except it wasn’t “their” property. It was public property, paid for by her taxes: her property.

    She was not in violation of the statewide mask mandate which gives exemptions both for health issues and outdoor social distancing.

    She was right to resist and all charges should be dropped.

    1. It’s kinda cute that so many people see it that way. Such a simple and naive way to see government.
      Taxes aren’t some kind of investment that gets you an ownership stake. They are resources taken from you by force with no promise of getting anything in return. Government isn’t some collective agreement or communal property thing. It’s “might makes right” and that’s it. If you are lucky, the government will mostly follow most of its own laws. That’s all you get. What a government takes from the people is the government’s. If the government deigns to allow you to use it’s property, you get to do it under the terms it sets.
      I don’t endorse this state of affairs, but that’s reality as far as I can tell.

      1. Ridiculous. Access to and use of public property differs from private property in many ways, in practice and not just in theory. You’re parroting your Playskool Communist student teachers from high school. Assuming you’ve been to high school.

  48. These kind of disagreements are very easy to avoid. Just follow the rules and/or the law–in this case, a mask mandate. Don’t blame the police for the conduct of scofflaws. Tbis woman was not tasked because of her failure to wear a mask. She was tasked because she refused to comply with the law in regard to trespassing and then resisted arrest for her unlawful behavior.
    Allowing wilful disobedience of the law will not make the world a better place. It will instead cause societies to descend into anarchy.

  49. These kind of disagreements are very easy to avoid. Just follow the rules and/or the law–in this case, a mask mandate. Don’t blame the police for the conduct of scofflaws. This woman was not tased because of her failure to wear a mask. She was tased because she refused to comply with the law in regard to trespassing and then resisted arrest for her unlawful behavior.
    Allowing wilful disobedience of the law will not make the world a better place. It will instead cause societies to descend into anarchy.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.